Expositions of Holy Scripture: St. LukeMaclaren, Alexander
Religion
Expositions of Holy Scripture: St. Luke
Maclaren, Alexander
Bible. Luke -- Commentaries
I. How came the dropsical man there? Possibly he had simply strayed
in to look on at the feast, as the freedom of manners then would
permit him to do. The absence of any hint that he came hoping for a
cure, and of any trace of faith on his part, or of speech to him on
Christ's, joined with his immediate dismissal after his cure, rather
favours the supposition that he had been put as the bait of the
trap, on the calculation that the sight of him would move Jesus to
heal him. The setters of the snare were 'watching' whether it would
work, and Jesus 'answered' their thoughts, which were, doubtless,
visible in their eyes. His answer has three stages--a question which
is an assertion, the cure, and another affirming question. All three
are met with sulky silence, which speaks more than words would have
done. The first question takes the 'lawyers' on their own ground,
and in effect asserts that to heal did not break the Sabbath. Jesus
challenges denial of the lawfulness of it, and the silence of the
Pharisees confesses that they dare not deny. 'The bare fact of
healing is not prohibited,' they might have said, 'but the acts
necessary for healing are.' But no acts were necessary for this
Healer's power to operate. The outgoing of His will had power. Their
finespun distinctions of deeds lawful and unlawful were spiders'
webs, and His act of mercy flew high above the webs, like some fair
winged creature glancing in the sunshine, while the spider sits in
his crevice balked. The broad principle involved in Jesus' first
question is that no Sabbath law, no so-called religious restriction,
can ever forbid helping the miserable. The repose of the Sabbath is
deepened, not disturbed, by activity for man's good.
The cure is told without detail, probably because there were no
details to tell. There is no sign of request or of faith on the
sufferer's part; there seems to have been no outward act on Christ's
beyond 'taking' him, which appears simply to mean that He called him
nearer, and then, by a simple exercise of His will, healed him.
There is no trace of thanks or of wonder in the heart of the
sufferer, who probably never had anything more to do with his
benefactor. Silently he comes on the stage, silently he gets his
blessing, silently he disappears. A strange, sad instance of how
possible it is to have a momentary connection with Jesus, and even
to receive gifts from His hand, and yet to have no real, permanent
relation to Him!
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account